Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

Levitts homes were originally priced significantly under market value, so pretty much any working family could afford them back then.

Please take a moment and read the third paragraph of the paper you linked to.

To paraphrase: median white income of $3K at the time could easily afford the $8K homes while median minority income of $1.5K could not.

It did not say anything about them being significantly under market value, though. By any chance did you see that in a different study?

Historically, minorities and women were earning less than their white male counterparts in that era, which the study in the link provided indicates by way of the median income. It would stand to reason that this form of financial segregation added to the racial segregation on LI and in other suburbs during that era.

You do realize that neighborhoods that are like 90% one race show the opposite of diversity... They show a segregation... So the lack of these on LI are actually a positive to diversity on LI...
Your comparing a city of 8 million people to two counties with a population of 2.5 million people... So of course you will have more in the City... I am sure the city also has more Nascar fans, registered republicans, etc...
I believe Statistics can be manipulated to say whatever you want them to say...
Which is why I dont not believe those statistics about NYC and LI being the most segregated places... Sure Manhattan only has like 3 neighborhoods, which are not 90% white... But it's very integrated bc people arent isolated to certain neighborhoods...
Same thing with Nassau... While, there are about 3 places that are 90% white, those people are not isolated to their neighborhoods and their neighborhoods are not isolated... People from Amityville can freely cross the border into Massapequa, as well Garden City residents are allowed acess to Hempstead and vice versa... The neighborhoods share restaurants, they share movie theaters, bars, nightclubs...

That's what I was saying: NYC has a lot of places where the racial composition is 90% one race. Some people will consider an area diverse if it has a low White population, but me and you consider diversity to mean that there is a reasonable mixing of races in an area.

So in that case, Bushwick (90% Hispanic) is as diverse as Massqpequa (90% White).

I don't see what you're saying about "more" of anything. That's why I was talking about percentages, not raw numbers.

In any case, NYC is far from being the most segregated area. If you look at some "Black" neighborhoods in cities such as Detroit, Atlanta, and New Orleans, they'll be something like 98% Black. In NYC (or Long Island for that matter), there is nothing that is that segregated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pequaman

You say that it "just looks more segregated" because it's more dense, and then you contradict yourself in the following paragraph. Density has nothing to do with the innate human desire of most people wanting to live with their own kind -- whether it be similar race, political affiliation, wealth, culture, etc..
Let's look at Hempstead, one of the densest areas on LI - ~[50% Black, 30% Hispanic, 20% other] Is that even considered segregated? as Harlem or Chinatown are in Manhattan, or Bushwick and Brownsville in BK?

Good post, someone gets it...

...while others don't.

/

The reason I brought up density is just relating to the map itself: From far away, it looks like these areas are homogenous, but when you zoom in, you can see some dots of other colors (representing other races) mixed in.

As far as Hempstead goes, it's somewhat diverse. It isn't overwhelmingly one race.

By the way, Harlem isn't that homogenous. It is something like 60% Black, 20% White, and 20% Hispanic. Even Brownsville is something like 80% Black and 20% Hispanic.

LI is probably THE most segregated place in the USA. What do YOU think???

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRodriguez

I currently live in Manhattan and sometimes LA but I lived in Garden City until I was 19 and is it just me or is Long Island racist? Everywhere I would go the people in Garden City who obviously were white would give me strange looks like I did not belong and I once went to a restaurant and my friend (who is dominican like me) were served last even though we came before most people and all the people were white except for my friend and I and and an Asian family. Also, Long Island seems to very segregated like Garden City is all white, while Hempstead is all black, etc. Do you think Nassau and Suffolk county are equally racist? I've talked to this black girl who lived in Garden City and she agreed with me about it being racist. Why is this?

Check out a few pages in this book and you will see how during that period blacks were unable to get government loans for houses in addition to being unable to buy a home even if they had the money. People want to deny racism and talk about how black people live in segregated ghettos, but here's the reason why: While white people were given no money down loans to buy real estate, from the govt, blacks got nothing.

Maybe all of them ere not racist, but a whole lot of them were, and though the laws have changed, not that much else has when it comes to living integrated.

Also google "sundown towns" and the block busting and white flight that took place in Roosevelt.

Check out a few pages in this book and you will see how during that period blacks were unable to get government loans for houses in addition to being unable to buy a home even if they had the money. People want to deny racism and talk about how black people live in segregated ghettos, but here's the reason why: While white people were given no money down loans to buy real estate, from the govt, blacks got nothing.

Maybe all of them ere not racist, but a whole lot of them were, and though the laws have changed, not that much else has when it comes to living integrated.

Also google "sundown towns" and the block busting and white flight that took place in Roosevelt.

What I don't understand is why Roosevelt, and other communities which experienced write flight, turned into lousy areas. The people who replaced the whites might have been a little poorer, but schools, businesses and such were in place, established. What made these communities spiral so much so that their schools are troubled and businesses have left? We can't blame it on the departure of a certain segment. Do we blame it on a change in values? Change in income?

Whites were leaving Roosevelt 40 years or more ago. Why hasn't it experienced any sort of change for the better? How can those of us outside the area promote positive change when it would appear that residents (not all) are complacent or just don't care?

Steering, red lining, mortgage issues were a long time ago. We need to move forward. People need to take responsibility for themselves and their environment. I know many well educated AA people who live and work in my community -- making more money than me, driving nicer cars, living in nicer homes. Most of them started out in real lousy areas. They took advantage of opportunities afforded to them and made a great life for themselves. When they moved here, no one fled. Why? We're not living in the past.

I realize that we are slightly off tangent discussing segregation, but I believe that what is now primarily self segregation gives LI the appearance of racism.

What I don't understand is why Roosevelt, and other communities which experienced write flight, turned into lousy areas. The people who replaced the whites might have been a little poorer, but schools, businesses and such were in place, established. What made these communities spiral so much so that their schools are troubled and businesses have left? We can't blame it on the departure of a certain segment. Do we blame it on a change in values? Change in income?

Whites were leaving Roosevelt 40 years or more ago. Why hasn't it experienced any sort of change for the better? How can those of us outside the area promote positive change when it would appear that residents (not all) are complacent or just don't care?

Steering, red lining, mortgage issues were a long time ago. We need to move forward. People need to take responsibility for themselves and their environment. I know many well educated AA people who live and work in my community -- making more money than me, driving nicer cars, living in nicer homes. Most of them started out in real lousy areas. They took advantage of opportunities afforded to them and made a great life for themselves. When they moved here, no one fled. Why? We're not living in the past.

I realize that we are slightly off tangent discussing segregation, but I believe that what is now primarily self segregation gives LI the appearance of racism.

PART of the reason such areas turned lousy is because a minority neighborhood is far more likely to have lower property values than white communities SO this allows slumlords/landlords to buy up homes for cheap and bring renters in (including section 8 ppl); and the more absentee landlords in a community, the more homes that are neglected since you know the landlord don't care about the appearance of a house but only about profit.

And renters are more likely to be lower income and lower income people are more prone to crime, drugs, wild-parties, having kids from broken/single family homes where parenting is less effective and so on.

And what middle class buyer would want to live in a neighborhood filled with neglected rental houses and crime? It's a cause and effect thing.

(If I was in charge of any community with lower property values, I would IMMEDIATELY change around the zoning so single family homes won't be able to be turned into cheap rentals.)

PART of the reason such areas turned lousy is because a minority neighborhood is far more likely to have lower property values than white communities SO this allows slumlords/landlords to buy up homes for cheap and bring renters in (including section 8 ppl); and the more absentee landlords in a community, the more homes that are neglected since you know the landlord don't care about the appearance of a house but only about profit.

And renters are more likely to be lower income and lower income people are more prone to crime, drugs, wild-parties, having kids from broken/single family homes where parenting is less effective and so on.

And what middle class buyer would want to live in a neighborhood filled with neglected rental houses and crime? It's a cause and effect thing.

(If I was in charge of any community with lower property values, I would IMMEDIATELY change around the zoning so single family homes won't be able to be turned into cheap rentals.)

I don't dispute what you've written, however, it came about after whites left. My curiosity is with what the whites saw/didn't like/feared of with the influx of minorities to cause them to leave. Were they just afraid? Did they view them as lower class? Did they see a lack of similar social or political values? Or is it possible that the area was already showing signs of age and a newer more desirable area was attracting some residents in advance of minorities moving in? (along the line of the Grand Concourse in the Bronx going downhill when Co-Op City opened.)

With respect to your proposal re rezoning it sounds reasonable. I am not a landlord but own a home. As a homeowner concerned with property value and creating a good community, I would support it. If I were a landlord, I might protest it as interfering with my property.

I don't dispute what you've written, however, it came about after whites left. My curiosity is with what the whites saw/didn't like/feared of with the influx of minorities to cause them to leave. Were they just afraid? Did they view them as lower class? Did they see a lack of similar social or political values? Or is it possible that the area was already showing signs of age and a newer more desirable area was attracting some residents in advance of minorities moving in? (along the line of the Grand Concourse in the Bronx going downhill when Co-Op City opened.)

With respect to your proposal re rezoning it sounds reasonable. I am not a landlord but own a home. As a homeowner concerned with property value and creating a good community, I would support it. If I were a landlord, I might protest it as interfering with my property.

Many Whites have never lived near any Blacks so fear was a huge factor since they didn't know what to expect; society was extremely segregated back then, both in the workforce and in housing, so nobody was educated on other races. Many also viewed their home as an investment and could speculate by looking at other suburbs that the Whites would move out once minorities started moving in and their homes would lose significant value; so it was like a domino effect. It was a variety of reasons and i'm sure everybody had their own reasons, just put yourself in a 1940's mindset with limited access to TV, limited social interaction and racial fear all around you.

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.